The Press & The Royals: a discussion

[Whaeanui]

As we were just having a great discussion on this topic I’m going to try again to continue it on a thread of its own. A previous thread highlighted two particularly prolific ‘royal reporters’, but the same is true for all. They often manufacture stories to create divisions between the women in the family, more often than the men. The public seem to feed off this and none of the family get treated very well except the monarch. So do we think it is possible for the royal family to stay relevant and in the publics mind without their unhealthy relationship with the media? Can social media replace this? What do you think they can do to make positive changes that would reflect an understanding of the mental health challenges the media intrusion results in? Also their role in charities that deal with mental health and misogyny, mistreatment of women etc could be impacted by this too. Thoughts?
Please do not derail this thread by discussing your personal dislike of particular members or if they deserve it. I would like a discussion on how the royal family could change the relationship with the press.

Tagging some posters who were engaging on this topic @Roussette @MrsMaxDeWinter @Morestrangerthings

@Dreamstate I think you were interested in this too

They could step down and make way for an elected President

Or they could accept a lot less money and prestige and do way fewer public engagements

You're calling for a deferential press that doesn't dare to criticise them, not something I'd ever want to see

The world is moving on, the only way papers seem to be making money is through clickbait articles.

So time for the Royal Family to cast aside this notion of needing the press on their side and go it alone and control their own news through social media, or their very own royal newsletter. So many mediums they can use

I suspect there is a bit more to it than that

There are lots of secrets that the 'royals' need hidden

Will they come clean ?
Until they do they need a complaint or at least malleable press

Arguing about who sits where and what god awful hat looks better than another god awful hat keeps eyes off the sex crimes and worse

You're calling for a deferential press that doesn't dare to criticise them, not something I'd ever want to see

No, that’s definitely not what I want. But the really intrusive articles and made up stories should be refuted every time.

@Novella4 yes perhaps that is at the heart of why they ‘put up with’ so much.

Every organisation has a kind of symbiotic relationship with relevant media. It's why media relations departments and press offices exist. There are several reasons why it's problematic for the Royal family.
(1) they / their staff play out internal politicking and jockeying for position in the media (which is why all the briefing, leaks, friend's comments etc happen)
(2) they don't do very much that's objectively newsworthy, except in relation to their personal lives - this is by design as they're supposed to be bland and politically neutral
(3) in addition to actual friends and acquaintances of BRF members, there's a hanger's on crew who are available to endlessly comment on everything they say/do (eg Lady Colin Campbell, Paul Burrell) none of whom actually have anything to do with the BRF themselves right now

The only thing that the BRF can really change is (1) but they've all got to do it. I think it's unlikely to happen.

If you're looking for wider changes, then you're asking British journalists to be more ethical and responsible in their work. Which is something I could support but probably needs an actual press regulator.

Nothing can be done. People love gossiping and talking about the royals like a slightly higher end version of Corrie and it sells papers and gets clicks, the more salacious the better. And the royals give it in spades with affairs and criminality (Andrew) and juicy stories (juicy to some people). There is no fixing it unless you want to censor and control the press aside from obviously regulating articles that are libellous or against the laws of the country, which would be a very dark day indeed even if it would suit a lot of politicians and celebs

the really intrusive articles and made up stories should be refuted every time.

This is difficult to achieve in practice. There are too many stories in too many outlets. And if you take the approach of rebutting everything no matter how ridiculous, then if you miss one, people will assume that it's true.

Personally I think the days of 'never complain never explain' should be buried in the past. They have to accept the press interest in their public lives as that is the job, but they absolutely should have the right to privacy outside of that. The blatant lies, half truths and intentional shit stirring that goes on from the media now is despicable.

If you're looking for wider changes, then you're asking British journalists to be more ethical and responsible in their work. Which is something I could support but probably needs an actual press regulator.

Oh yes, that is absolutely needed! Not likely though is it

@Lizzt2007 it really is despicable. It’s not something most people could deal with well at all, if anyone. I can’t imagine it’s healthy for any of them.

They could step down and make way for an elected President

Interesting suggestion. What would that look like though? Stepping down would require the entire family agreeing as there’s always someone who could take the top job. Is it even possible for them?

It's not print media that the issue although the constant muck raking is tiresome, it's social media which is a cesspit. Far more damaging as people don't read that many newspapers any longer. Can't remember the last time i bought a newspaper How do you put that genie back in the box. This nonsense about William having an affair originated there as did the moon bump nonsense

@limoncello23

Are you aware that the 'royals ' are not subject to the Freedom of Information Act?
I'm afraid that shoots your 'they are just like every other organisation' out of the water

They are NOT like every other organisation

The guardian has been asking about ( among many other things!) where the millions of gifted to the nation jewels have gone .
Door slammed each time
Why?
Because 'royals'
bow, scrape, ask no questions and read your tabloid pleb

The trouble is...it's all sort of "look we'll print these great pics and uplifting story about you if you just tell us about blah blah"

The press is out of control. Gone are the days of complete deference on all things royal. Media realises gossip, arguments, friction and rows make money. Pandora's box is well and truly open

I think I prefer what we currently have to the syrupy, sycophantic PR puffs that you read in some magazines, where the interview has only been allowed because the celeb has editorial control. Ditto, the suck-up dishonesty on chat shows.

Yes, we need regulation to keep in check phone-bugging etc, but in general, I lean towards media freedom.

@Whaeanui

Simple .
Charles becomes the first president .
Gets paid a salary

Then hands over to the first elected president .

@Novella4 I’m not sure people would be happy with an unelected President for any length of time though.

@HeddaGarbled in principle I do, but tabloids are different and write so much with only a few people owning all of them that I think they’re a law unto themselves. The fact they got away with so much bugging, possibly tapping and hacking phones… it is troubling to me that it’s as out of hand as it is in the name of ‘press freedom’.

@purpledalmation
I thought you'd changed to orange ?

There is little difference between print media and social media
Links are put up on a Twitter post constantly

I was a news addict getting three broadsheet papers a day years ago ( for range lol) - until I woke up !

Twitter is wonderful in places - I have 'met' wonderful people and made connections I never would have otherwise

In many ways, the US press and gossip mags are worse and we're behind many of the worst articles about recent events. It is too narrow a picture to only look at British tabloids and even a British press regulator would have no control over a global gossip market for royal stories. Love them or loathe them, the press can always say that they are in the public interest because the fact is, they are interested. The cat is never going back in the bag.

@Whaeanui
I wouldn't be either but it would help some people adjust

Just an idea .

Also Reddit is a wonderful resource !

I barely look at the 'news' now .
I'm particularly disappointed in the BBC - mournathon was a disgrace

I agree. Twitter is a cesspit in places (and I avoid those places) but for getting the news hot off the press from a wide variety of media from all over the world it's brilliant. And for niche hobbies. And for comedy too